In most cases the victims were not aware, meaning they still had ample use of their proverbial property. This is in fact the normally desired state of malware, to act like a pest or a leech - your estate suffers but not in a very noticeable way.
I think most people would object to their yard being turned upside down because some e.g. illegal grasshoppers were present...so in that sense yes they should provide notice...if able.
Which is where the concept of "estate" falls apart a bit. Unless you can positively map every node to a single responsible actor, then it is unreasonable to provide notice. Furthermore, there are so many components to modern tech systems that it is not reasonable that anyone would know or care the exact goings on of their systems (usually).
That is, if you use the web and execute from it, in some sense you cannot (or should not) hold fully liable any one entity, in some small sense the malware has turned your computer into public property anyways, so the actions of the FBI are not entirely unreasonable.
If you cry foul this action then even more so you should cry foul the actions of any public update service etc...vendor updates always carry a similar risk.
What I could say, if there were some common message format for indicating to the user what was to happen, then it would be reasonable to require notification of such. But likely there is no such thing so mainly this argument is rhetorical.
In most cases the victims were not aware, meaning they still had ample use of their proverbial property. This is in fact the normally desired state of malware, to act like a pest or a leech - your estate suffers but not in a very noticeable way.
I think most people would object to their yard being turned upside down because some e.g. illegal grasshoppers were present...so in that sense yes they should provide notice...if able.
Which is where the concept of "estate" falls apart a bit. Unless you can positively map every node to a single responsible actor, then it is unreasonable to provide notice. Furthermore, there are so many components to modern tech systems that it is not reasonable that anyone would know or care the exact goings on of their systems (usually).
That is, if you use the web and execute from it, in some sense you cannot (or should not) hold fully liable any one entity, in some small sense the malware has turned your computer into public property anyways, so the actions of the FBI are not entirely unreasonable.
If you cry foul this action then even more so you should cry foul the actions of any public update service etc...vendor updates always carry a similar risk.
What I could say, if there were some common message format for indicating to the user what was to happen, then it would be reasonable to require notification of such. But likely there is no such thing so mainly this argument is rhetorical.